As the Great Recession hit, not only did casual truck buyers vanish, but automakers were forced to do some serious belt-tightening. The result: Relative to pickups, the goal was to appeal to core truck people, listen to customer input, and use resources wisely to keep loyalists happy and win over new buyers. That is precisely what has happened in this Truck of the Year contest. Model-year 2012 is punctuated more by pointed improvements than dramatic change. Four contenders qualified: the Ford F-150, Nissan NV, Ram Laramie Longhorn, and Toyota Tacoma.
All manufacturers were welcome to provide variants, but only Ford accepted, sending us two F-150s powered by the volume V-8 and V-6. That brought the total number of trucks tested to five. After completing unloaded acceleration and braking tests in Fontana, California, we hit the road. Judges drove the pickups unloaded, with payload, and with a trailer. We started north of Los Angeles and drove to Nissan's top-notch Arizona Test Center outside Phoenix. The facility provided trailers, payload, and a variety of road surfaces in a safe, controlled environment.

We evaluated each truck based on how it achieved what it was designed to do, based on six specific criteria shown at right. We took extensive notes, spent long hours driving, and had some fairly heated discussions. By the time it was over, we had selected Motor Trend's 2012 Truck of the Year. Read on to see how each contestant performed, and which came out on top.

THE CRITERIA
Each TOTY contender
is evaluated against
six key criteria. They are:

DESIGN ADVANCEMENT
Quality execution of exterior and interior styling; innovation in vehicle packaging; good selection and use of materials.ENGINEERING EXCELLENCE
Integrity of total vehicle concept and execution; clever solutions to packaging, manufacturing, and dynamics issues; use of cost-effective technologies that benefit the consumer.PERFORMANCE OF
INTENDED FUNCTION
How well the vehicle does the job its designer and product planners intended.EFFICIENCY
Low fuel consumption and carbon footprint, relative to the vehicle's competitive set.SAFETY
Primary safety -- the vehicle's ability to help the driver avoid a crash -- as well as secondary safety measure that protect occupants from harm during a crash.VALUE
Price and equipment levels measured against those of vehicles in the same market segment.

THE JUDGES

Mike Febbo

Associate Editor

Allyson Harwood

Executive Editor, Truck Trend

Ron Kiino

Editor At Large

Jonny Lieberman

Senior Editor

Scott Mortara

Road Test Editor

Kim Reynolds

Testing Director

Nissan NVBy Jonny LiebermanWE LIKE: Honest, utilitarian, refreshing. Nissan redefines the full-size van market.WE DON'T LIKE: No diesel and appalling gas mileage. Perhaps too niche for its own good."This feels almost like a whole new category of vehicle," says Febbo of Nissan's first ever full-size van. If you haven't driven a full-size van in a while, here's the scoop: They're primitive things. Whereas, by contrast, our high-roof NV felt pretty darn good. "It's quick and ridiculously nimble and easy to drive, despite its hugely intimidating stature," says Jurnecka. Kiino agrees: "Feels seriously smaller than it is, as in it feels like a full-size SUV as opposed to a gargantuan van."
The NV is fast, too. "Good power and responsive tranny -- I like the throttle blips," notes Kiino. "It feels like the fastest thing here," observes Febbo. The actual numbers tell a different story, as the high-roofed 3500 took 8.5 seconds to reach 60 mph. Only Torquemada, the diesel Ram, was slower. Why did it feel so quick? We're guessing a lack of sound insulation. Says the guy with the engineering degree (Febbo), "The perception of speed might just be the exhaust echoing around in the huge, empty cabin." Very true, and counters Kiino, "What do you expect with a big, hollow tin box?" Harwood points out, "The panels on the inside of the cargo area seem cheap."

Which brings us to what we found most endearing about the NV: its honesty. The NV is a large van you use to haul stuff. It's not a lifestyle statement, nor an ego-inflator, nor a way of warning others that you're tough/anti-social. It's just a really well-thought-out, heavy-duty van. In a world full of MBA-researched lifestyle vehicles, the NV's honesty shines through as a real virtue. However, as Febbo warns, "Yes, I like this thing. But do I really know what a plumber wants in a vehicle?"
More important, does Nissan? While we all appreciated the no-frills NV, will consumers? And will those same potential consumers want to spend their hard-earned money on something so freakish looking? Again, I can intellectually appreciate the exposed hinges and how the form follows function (by a mile if not more), but I'm not the target demo. And where's the diesel? Bottom line: The NV is a wonderful work truck, but just a touch too specialized to bring home our award.

Im reviewing TOTYs in retrospect in 2015...it is obvious that MotorTrend stopped performing journalism in 2012 and began promoting political activism. This 2012 TOTY article is simply political activism for "green" vehicles. Looking back to 2011 TOTY...MotorTrend actually compared REAL TRUCKS to Real trucks...in this years comparison...they compared "almost trucks"...(ie cars with truck and van bodies) to each other. In contrast last year MT mocked the environmentalist wackos by scientifically explaining how advancements in diesel and diesel technolgies had surpassed environmentalist expectations...this year in 2012...these bogus journalists act like disel engines are a plague, not event testing real trucks, but metro/homosexual transport vehicles...intended for on road use only, and for Gods sake dont even think about pulling a trailer or doing a trucks real purpose...work...useless piece of trash this article...Im sure the F150 is a fine "commuter" truck...problem is the article never PROVES IT...SHAME ON MT

I am confused yet again by MT's Vehicle of the Year tests. Why would you test a Dodge 3500, a Nissan workVan, a small Toyota pickup, and an F150 with the same criteria? Yes, Ford's new engines are great but the truck is hardly new. But the trucks are so different the F150 was bound to win because of the 4, it would be the best daily driver. No one buys a van designed as a service truck who doesn't need one. And a ton dually for daily driving? So that leaves the Toyota and the Ford. No contest. So could be have a comparison test please instead of this "let's come up with a way to recognize the best selling truck that has new engines" contest? Just sayin'.

Well -- what did you expect the outcome to be?Ford had a huge head start over the competition (we're talking decades, people) and they treat the F-Series like their golden goose. Long after Toyota and Nissan throw in the towel on their duds, Ford will be offering more of the best. That's how they roll.

This is the worst Truck of the Year comparison I have ever read. The real winner should be the Nissan NV becasue it is the only new truck here. The 2012 Fords are exactly the same as the 2011's. The only thing different about the Toyota is a very slightly redesigned grill. No new engines or transmissions. The Dodge 2500HD won last year's award and the 3500HD is only different in the number of wheels it has. I guess if Chevrolet had changed the brand of tires it put on it's trucks, Motor Trend would have included them also. And why does Motor Trend include vans in both the Car of the Year and Truck of the Year comparisons? Vans should be thrown in with the Sport Utility of the Year contest.

This is the worst piece of journalism I have come across in a long time. To say giving Ford the crown was "wired" is an understatement. As a result, no-one really cares to read MT's articles and for those that happen to hear about the winner, few will realize this comparison was not worthy of being put on paper. I would not even consider buying a truck based upon this article. MT is becoming less and less relevant to serious consumers based upon this type of award. The buzz on the internet already plays a greater role on consumer habits in buying automobiles than MT ever had.

@opoao Ford was very fortunate by mortgaging assets when values were over-inflated & money was too easy. Ford's "bailout" was loose monetary policy & the lucky foresight to capitalize on it before the floor fell out of the credit markets, allowing them to stand on their own... makes a great advertising campaign, even though their product sucks. I know first hand, since I've managed a fleet with over 60 F150's. I've had consistent issues with the driveshaft & engines (cams & lifters), increased maintenance/operating costs and a 10% catastrophic failure of engine or transmission before the first oil change. More than half of my fleet has required replacement of the driveshaft before 100k and more than a 1/3 needing upper engine work... "bailout" is a cheap shot, just like Ford's trucks! GM got a loan from the government, which was the only entity that could provide cash when banks were not. So, what??? I'd rather drive a GM that works than a Ford... ever hear the word union? They crippled the industry.

I don't feel like there is a good conclusion to the "Truck of the Year". I'd rather see contenders of the same weight class square off. WHy pick that gaudy bloated RAM 3500. Seriously, throw a Ram 1500. The outcome would be more educational.

Reading articles like this is fun. It takes my mind off the fact that these lumbering wildebeasts won't be clogging the roads and shopping plazas across the country in the near future. I chuckle at the gearheads and 'enthusiasts' who try to dispute the phenominon known as peak oil. Guess what, turds? When the bombs start dropping in Tehran and Straight of Hormuz is blocked $200/bbl and trucks will be mutually exclusive. Enjoy this while it lasts!

Not surprised,but why the hell is the Tacoma included,that turd hasnt had any real mechanical or chassis upgrades since 2005. And Nissan needs to figure out what 1500,2500 and 3500 really means,not just throw a taller roof on it but make 1/2,3/4 and 1 ton configurations.